Ray was a sales representative (a rep in common parlance) in the 1970s and 1980s. His employer issued him a car to drive on business and for his personal use. He had a choice of car from a selection, colour and some of the options to go with it. Like most of his breed, his car was almost more important than anything, not least for what it said about him.

Known as a ”user chooser”, his choice and the financial offer behind it to his employer were crucial to the fleet market of the time, as were the bulk buys for higher volume fleets. By 1976 in the UK, Ford had a tight grip on this market, with the Escort, Cortina and Granada. BL tried to compete, with the Allegro, Marina, Princess and Rover SD1. Chrysler and Vauxhall (GM) were not as strong, and imports were not favoured by British industrial users, to say the least. Private buyers were different, but much less numerous.

Ford had defined the product format in all the volume areas for the UK market from the early 1960s. Few cars have defined their market place as comprehensively as the 1970-76 Ford Cortna Mk3 (above). Others, such as BMC, had tried to define it in other ways but those formats had gained industry traction only slowly, and then only with significant changes from the first draft presented by BMC. But by 1980, the standard set by Ford for the previous 20 years was moving.

In 1980, Ford conceded to the compact family hatchback template defined by the VW Golf, Renault 14 and Fiat Ritmo/Strada, with the first front wheel drive Escort, following the 1976 Fiesta supermini, which also conformed to market standards. But the conservative rear wheel drive, live rear axle Cortina (now in its last form as the Cortina 80 or Mk V, above) remained.

GM’s British brand remained even further adrift. Not only did it resist the convergence to the front wheel drive template for the Golf class car until 1979, Vauxhall was as far out of step from the Ford and the market, with the oddly sized Viva and Victor ranges, both of which were also hampered (in the UK) by the very American styling, poor quality, a reputation for corrosion and ill matched engine sizes compared to the Ford standard. CC has looked before at the history of the Victor, and how it ended up between the Cortina and Granada in size and engine specifications.

The upshot of this is that the UK was the only major market in Europe in which GM trailed Ford in volume, and GM had a team “playing at home” as well. You just know that that hurt.

GM had a plan – after the early 1970s Viva/Firenza disaster in Canada, Vauxhall had its wings trimmed. Without the North American sales, the volume was not enough for GM to fund two European model ranges. Vauxhall came under Opel’s wing after the 1972 Victor; indeed this last Victor shared a floorpan with the 1972 Opel Rekord D. From the 1975 Chevette (T car) onward, Vauxhalls fitted much more closely to the GM defaults. By 1979, the whole UK developed Vauxhall range had been replaced by cars shared directly with Opel, give or take grilles and badges. Opel stopped selling in the UK; Vauxhall sold only in the UK.

The first generation Cavalier, based on the Opel Ascona B, was the first car with a UK badge to truly take the fight to the nation’s favourite and best seller – the Ford Cortina. This was a car that showed up the Ford’s inadequacies clearly, in ride and handling principally. But, still the Ford led the market by volume.

In 1981, the rear drive Cavalier was replaced by a front wheel drive car on the GM J car platform, with MacPherson struts and a torsion beam rear axle. Here was a car that not only took the fight to the Cortina but knocked it over on almost any relevant criteria. And unlike BLMC’s attempts to compete, it was unashamedly aimed directly at the Cortina. GM were going for Ford’s jugular.

I spent the summer of 1983 on an internship with an industrial boiler manufacturer in Yorkshire, for part of which I was assigned to the company’s on-the-road sales representative, Ray. Ray was a classic rep, doing probably four days a week on the road. To be fair to him, he was more than a pure sales guy, doing all the follow up, maintaining the link whilst the equipment was built and preparing the customer for the installation and commissioning. So this is a bit of caricature – a friendly one, as he taught me some things I still use day to day. Though arranging customer meetings in breweries just before lunch is not one of them….

Ray was very keen for me to know that his car (well, the Company’s car, given to him to use and chosen by him) was a Cavalier 1.6GL, not a 1.3, and a GL, so it had a rev counter, tinted glass and velour upholstery. Most specifically, it was not the “L” someone had tried to get him to accept, and I needed to know that. He’d had more than one Cortina, of various sorts for many years, and then a (disappointing) Chrysler Alpine. Also, his Cavalier 1.6GL was more powerful than the Cortina 1600, and faster from 0-60 mph. Important when you’re selling boiler equipment to potato chip factories and hospitals, apparently.

The Cavalier J car was offered in saloon, hatchback and later estate forms, which used body panel pressings imported from Holden in Australia. The hatchback was something else the Cortina did not offer, but quickly took the majority of sales. Engines were, initially at least, 1.3 and 1.6 four cylinder OHC Opel engines. A diesel was added in 1983, as was the Cavalier’s strongest engine, the 1.8 litre fuel injected version of the 1.6 engine. Here was a 1.8 litre engine that out pointed the Ford 2.0 litre in just about every way, and set the bar at a level the 1984 Austin Montego would be challenged to reach. Ray would have studied the brochures quickly and worked out a justification for a 1.8 on his next car.

Vauxhall had another advantage, which played well in two ways. The car came in 1981, a year before the Ford Sierra, when the Cortina was showing its age in many ways, in engineering and in achievement. Europe was also waking up to what a modern family saloon could be like, and it wasn’t a rear drive saloon car with a live rear axle.

The second is that the Cavalier came as a saloon or a five door hatchback, with strong Chevrolet Citation or even Rover 3500SD1 overtones. Ford could not match that, even with the new Sierra, which had its own issues.

Of these, the largest were the hatchback only configuration, which didn’t match Ford’s customers’ experience, the styling which was felt to be too radical and some surprising technical features, such as four speed only gearboxes. The market did not take to the Sierra, as seen here by kurztos on the CC Cohort, very quickly or very convincingly, whilst Vauxhall made specification enhancements to the Cavalier. The 1.8 litre with fuel injection came in 1983, used initially on the luxury CD and the sports SRi versions. The CD was able to compete with the Sierra 2.0 Ghia with all Ford’s well honed luxury features, and the SRi (and 1.6SR before it, like the green and grey 1982 feature car above) were great image builders for the Cavalier, and Vauxhall. I can only begin to imagine how excited Ray would have been about one of these.

In 1983 and 1984, the Cavalier outsold the Ford Sierra in the UK – the market leader’s key new mid- market product had been outshone by an upstart from a brand that five years before was almost at also-ran status. And, although this was not a major influence, the Cavalier was built in Luton, so could claim to be British.

In 1985 and 1987 Vauxhall gave the Cavalier some visual tweaks and additional equipment, and then added another image builder – the SRi130, with a 130bhp 2.0 litre engine and 125mph capability – here was a car almost as fast as the range topping 2.9 litre Sierra XR4x4. If he’d got a good order from a chip factory or brewery, Ray would have made a case for an 2.0 litre Sri.

Ford responded with the 1987 Sierra – visually a complete rework of the existing car to tone down the aerodynamic nature of the styling, and added a four door saloon as well. Fianlly, the Sierra outsold the Cavalier in Britain.

In 1988, Vauxhall launched the Mk3 Cavalier, on the GM2900 platform, paired with the Opel Vectra A. The style was a professional mix of conservative and fashionable – looking more modern than the old car ever did but not too modern as the original Sierra did. It was a car that was again genuinely fully competitive in an ever improving class; in some areas, it was the class leader, particularly in the performance of the 2.0 litre version. Here was a car for Ray that was faster than a Golf GTi, yet could carry all you wanted in the boot and give away no signs of excess. He’d have worked hard on his letters to HR and have made a persuasive case.

Vauxhall again structured the range carefully, from L to GL to GLS to SRi to CD. Ray would soon learn the key points to spot – a base model had grey bumpers, the L had body colour ones, the GL had headlamp wipers, the SRi added black trim and red badges, the CD added some chrome effect. Ray wouldn’t have been satisfied with less than a GL 2.0i; merely thinking about his likely state of mind at this point worries me.

The Cavalier was now one of the motorway cars of choice – it was admirably quiet and stable at speed, interior space was good and there was a motorsport connection as well. The Cavalier performed strongly in the British Touring Car Championship (BTCC) which in the early 1990s got made some very entertaining television. With popular drivers who had pretty tolerant views on what a non-contact motorsport should be like, the Cavalier made an impression and Vauxhall won some the team championships with it. It was the base for the Calibra Coupe as well.

The feature car is a 1994 Cavalier 2.0 CDi – close to the top of the range, and a daily driver.

This car took the fight back to Ford – from 1990 to 1993 it again outsold the Sierra to lead the market sector. Ray was again watching the new trime levels and options, and eyeing up a GSi 2000, with all that Vauxhall could add to it, including a 16 valve head and four wheel drive. Failing that, a Diplomat with leather trim might do.

Ray knew the company wouldn’t stretch to a 2.5litre V6, and that his consequent tax bill would be too high anyway. This had the 167bhp engine from the larger Opel/Vauxhall Omega. Airbags and ABS were now standard on all but the base models.

The Cavalier and Vectra A were succeeded in 1995 by the Vauxhall Vectra (Opel Vectra B), also marketed under Holden and Chevrolet names in other markets. This was built on the same GM2900 platform and carried evolutionary styling, but somehow lacked the Cavalier’s appeal. It was not a bad car; rather it was overlooked in favour of the front wheel drive Ford Mondeo, Renault Laguna and Citroen Zantia in the corporate car park pecking order.

Ray wasn’t keen; he’d heard about the new VW Passat (B5) coming to the UK in early 1997 and knew about the tax advantages he could claim for its 1.9 litre turbo diesel. That seemed more befitting, now, than a Vauxhall. Maybe, if the right contracts came in, he might even be able to make a case for an Audi A4.

And the largest evidential fact that the Cavalier affected Ford? Since the 1993 Ford Mondeo, every new Ford in Europe has been at or close to best in class. You couldn’t say that in 1981.

92 Comments

Putting an 1800 engine in the top model was a sharp move – under the UK’s then very generous car tax system, Ray would be taxed on a fixed sum linked to engine capacity, with higher sums applying over 1800 and 2200cc – thresholds allegedly set to suit BMC and their odd sized engines, not that it did them any good. The taxable sum was also significantly below the true cost of buying, maintaining, taxing and insuring the car. And providing a car even if the employee didn’t really need it suited the employer too – in an era like the 1970s when govt urged and even imposed pay restraint on everybody, giving a better or bigger car could compensate, and, as a bonus, didn’t attract a payroll tax on the employer.

I didn’t know the loss of the Canadian market was the “last straw” that caused GM to consolidate Opel and Vauxhall. Frankly, I was surprised that Ford AND GM managed to keep 2 different model lines, in two fairly close “territories”, going at the same time.

While vehicles in the U.S. are engineered to meet certain laws (emissions and safety come to mind), it’s hard to imagine countries where cars are engineered with the tax laws specifically in mind…though the U.K. isn’t the only one. And now, with European countries imposing “carbon taxes”, a car company can live or die if it markets diesel-powered cars and/or hybrids.

Instead of being straightforward & emulating Europe (they’re so clever, you know) by aggressive fuel or engine taxation, Congress imposed CAFE standards, which destroyed the Yank Tank, yet resurrected it in the guise of even more thirsty, but exempt, trucks & SUVs.

I think the reason was, they feared they’d get crucified if they tried to levy a tax which hit rich & poor instantly & painfully. But this is no worse than sales taxes, which are constantly being raised locally.

When I was 17, my friend Neil had the use of his dad’s SRi, and it was certainly the car of choice in our group of friends. It was the only car I had ever been in that really forced you back in your seat, and it was nimble and safe on the back roads. Also looked good in white and had a very pleasant interior – Ray would definitely have gone for it.

Roger thanks for this interesting history. Looking back from an American point of view, I would have never thought that the J car could be considered superior to the RWD Cortina and even Sierra. We forget how simple the Pinto like engineering was on those. To use them as motorway cars would show the engineering advancements of the J car in the areas of ride, quiet and economy. I dare say also the Ford CVH engine was a step below the Opel offerings of the time.

I loved reading about Ray and him trying to get his company to spring for ever higher trim levels. Not only for his comfort but also his increasing stature. Since USA tax rules don’t line up, a company car is not as common a perk of a job. We don’t think of this class of car that way, something that size is always closer to entry level.

You appropriately ended up with many of these buyers going to the smaller end of the German luxury makes. It would be an interesting side by side to see Ray’s first and last car in a long career.

I think the sales rep niche in the USA was mainly Taurus, Lumina, Grand Prix, and Intrepid. They were up a size or two and a couple of cylinders from Great Britain, but as with Britain they were predisposed to be domestic.

An “executive car” is the UK name for a large family car. That’s the E-segment on Continental Europe. Examples: Audi A6, BMW 5-series, Mercedes E-Class, Volvo S80, Maserati Ghibli. Japanese executive cars, not available anymore, were the Toyota Camry, Honda Legend and Nissan Maxima.

The J-car was supposed to be a reach upward for a GM compact at launch, with the Cavalier priced to compete with the Honda Accord. Unfortunately, it was cost-cut to the point where potential buyers couldn’t see the premium, which led to price cuts and further decontenting with it finally aging into the econobox role.

It wasn’t all cost cutting compared to the European Cavalier. We were much likely to have AT, AC, PS, CC. To power all that we had bigger engines more tuned for torque. Imagine trying to run those common features on the 1.3 engine standard in Great Britain.

The J car was competitive with the 79 Accord it benchmarked when being designed. The problem, as with all benchmarking, is that when it came out in 1981 the 82 much better Accord was about to come out.

I had a MK3 1800 when almost new – a very good mile muncher and nice to ride in with a quality interior. No problems in about 40, 000 miles and got a good resale price. These were considered a very good car at the time.

In 1999 or 2000, I bought a used 1993 Opel Vectra (1.6i, 5spd manual) as my first car, and it was indeed a very nice vehicle – a good motorway cruiser for the time while at the same time still manageable size for city driving. It was let down only by serious rust issues (and with my particular example, no A/C and no airbags).
I have some very fond memories of this car.

When Ford had their transmission plant in Batavia OH, there were some early production Mondeos running around that side of Cincinnati…they must have imported a few for test mules or somesuch. This was before the US market Contour/Mystique was in production, and compared to existing boxy Ford sedans, the Mondeo was really slick looking. Unfortunately the Mondeo/Contour/Mystique flopped in the US.

Does the “user chooser” thing still exist in England now? In my experience, company cars have never been a real common thing in the US. I had one when I worked for Coca Cola, but driving a Cavalier wagon with a big red decal on the door was nothing to get excited about.

Company cars were once much more common in the U.S. Changes in the tax code, starting in the ’80s, took a bite out of the number, and subsequent economy moves on the part of companies took care of the rest.

It also doesn’t help that personal use by the employee must be logged, is considered income to the employee, and taxed. For that reason, when given a choice, a surprising number of people at my company choose to use their own car and take a mileage reimbursement.

I think the user-chooser situation is still pretty common in the U.K. although they keep mucking about with the tax classes. Since about 2001, the tax hit is now directly dependent on CO2 output rather than displacement, so it seems the pressure is now toward smaller cars or ‘tax-beater’ specials that can squeak just under the limit for certain tiers.

Remembering one of the last Ford Sierra ad on TV somewhere around 1992. Then the model was approx. 10 years old. As students and car fans we thought that Sierra will last longer as it was always updated during the years… Well in 1993 a colleague’s of ours family had decided to source the then brand new Mondeo! The first Mondeo was a breathtaking very proportionate car after the quite old Sierra. Some years later Contour and Mystique started to appear on the streets (privately imported new/used) which we found out that these two were the U.S.-refinements of the “original” euro-Mondeo. For me personally the Contour/Mystique bunch is a bit more attractive than the Mondeo. Especially the rear end of theirs.

It’s such a shame our Cavalier was so Americanized when it launched and not as good as the cars offered in Europe. However, it’s absolutely mind boggling that GM did not give us the Mk3 version at all. Imagine how Chevrolet might have been able to more effectively compete with the rising Japanese stars if that car had been offered instead of the seemingly ancient and increasingly cheap/chintzy original Cavalier J.

I am not sure it would have worked so well. The Saab 900, 9-3, and Saturn LS were on this platform in USA and I don’t think they were successes. The import buyer would not have been willing too pay Honda level transaction prices on a new generation Cavalier, however good it was. Getting away from Ford and Chevrolet was a big part of their buying decision. Keeping the old Cavalier around, ours was restyled in 88 too remember, while it gradually got more reliable and cheaper to produce, was probably the only way to keep USA production at such a high level. The US Cavalier was selling a lot of units in the early nineties.

I had a Mk II 1.8GL hatchback in black from 1986-89, which I pounded mercilessly back and forth across London; I treated it badly and (for the most part) it treated me well. Of course, it was a company car, a big step up from the Escort 1.3L it succeeded. The photo of the MkII cabin above is Proustian – I’d forgotten about the care one took, prior to a long trip, to select the right five cassettes to stow away in those spring-loaded drawers below the heater controls.

Most memorable moment: hitting a pot of white paint on the junction of Cromwell Road and Queens Gate, outside the Natural History Museum. The resultant splatter was visible on the street for a couple of years afterwards. Took the car into a workshop under some railway arch to see if I’d damaged the underside. “No damage, guv,” said the gaffer “but that’s a beautiful white paint-job!”. By some miracle, the black bodywork was practically untouched, a touch-up stick did the job quite adequately. It was, after all, a company car (and I never told the company…).

In 1989 I traded up to a Carlton – my first taste of executive living (it had a carphone!), but a bit of a lump compared to the Cav. Can’t remember the last time I saw one in the wild.

Both Ford and Opel had some serious things to worry about in the mid-nineties, regarding the D-segment. These things were: the 1994 Renault Laguna, the 1995 Peugeot 406 and (above all) the 1996 VW Passat B5. And all of them had better diesels than Ford and Opel.

The gradual conversion of most of these rep cars to diesel must have been a blow to these sales reps who drove them. The really high torque of todays diesels was still a few years off. The mileage improvement is obvious but the lack of high rpm horsepower and higher weight would seem to cancel some of the high redline, manual transmission fun these earlier cars promise.

The most common and wanted “rep diesel” in the nineties was Volkswagen’s 1.9 TDI engine. Direct injection + turbo charger. 90 hp to begin with, but pretty soon also 110 and 130 hp. It was in the Golf, but also in the Passat and Audi A4.

Yes, the acceleration from 0-62 mph wasn’t as quick as the gasoline counterpart. But frankly, nobody gave a damn. These things rolled down the freeway all day long with superb fuel efficiency. And the speed limit in most Euro-countries is 75 to 80 mph anyway, regardless gas or diesel.

Best car diesels, by far, are built by the French (PSA and Renault), the Italians (Fiat Group and VM Motori) and the Germans (read: VAG, Mercedes and BMW). Especially Mercedes and Peugeot go many decades back when it comes to car diesels.

Naturally aspirated diesels indeed had relatively poor performance, but when turbocharged diesels were introduced, they were more than adequate. 0-100 kmh times were not much to write home about, but they are somewhat irrelevant, at least in this type of car. What turbodiesels did offer was solid ‘thrust’ at around 2000 rpm which was great especially on motorways (for merging and quick overtaking), and this is what comparable (mostly 1.6 or 1.8-liter) n/a petrol engines couldn’t provide.
And with a rep car, surely fuel economy is a major factor. In addition to better mileage, diesel fuel is cheaper than petrol in most European countries (although I think this is not the case in the UK).

Peugeot have been putting out high performance diesels since 86, you dont need high rpm hp and you dont get it in diesels but idiots still think revs = power speed, at 100mph my 406 Peugeot would accelerate quite briskly for a 4 cylinder more briskly the a 3800 V6 Holden, mind you 4th gear only ran out of puff at 150kmh about 95 mph just change. In the pug 406 range my 2,1 TD was the equivalent on performance of the turbo petrol 2.0L it would blitz rubbish like Mondeos and the featured Vauxhall literally.

Thank you for the explanation on company cars in England. I knew these were much more prevalent than here but just didn’t know the specifics that had lead to it. This clears up my longtime uncertainty.

Ray sounds a lot like my kind of guy. I must admit some guilt in doing horse trading at various times to improve my assigned ride.

I’d love to read a fuller explanation of the European sales rep car/tax thing and how it affected the various markets! I’ve seen the phrase “repmobile” but never quite understood all of the implications (automotive, social, and otherwise).

That’s very hard, because tax laws etc. differ from country to country.

In general: the typical rep car in Europe is a European D-segment sedan or wagon. These days that segment is dominated by VAG, BMW and Mercedes. A synonym for a D-segment car is a “middle-class car”. Class as in size. Bigger than a VW Golf, yet smaller than an Audi A6.

Most of them have a 4 cylinder common rail turbodiesel, 1.6 to 2.0 liter displacement. Power up to 170-180 hp, mostly around 150 hp.

In Israel one has the so called “leasing vehicle” – Israeli companies, due to the taxation system – almost always lease their cars. These are hated by most individualistic car enthusiasts; because of the high level of orders, companies standardize on basic and common levels of trim (ones which are just high enough to please employees) and that in its turn means dealers only import cars with these specs – so that often, interesting models are not sold in Israel. Once the lease is over, masses of these cars are sold on to the public at more or less fixed prices which of course does nothing to reducing the price of used vehicles – at a country in which cars are very expensive anyway. A leasing car is also a derogatory expression, the type of goods to be used by the average, most uninteresting person typically working in a high tech company: the exact opposite of the individualistic car guy… The equivalent of the Cav/Sierra used to be the Mazda 3, but in recent years it’s some kind of Korean (although lately Ford has moved in with the Focus).

Something quite similar you can see in Europe when talking about leased fleetcars. Boss allowes for himself “top of the list” Insignia V6 / Mondeo V6 /Superb V6 or Octavia. Employees has the average: Astra / Focus / Fabia (3 cylinder) or whatever similar korean base models. Bosses has the right for individuality.

Unfortunately, I don’t live in the UK, so I don’t get to see Vauxhalls and British Fords. I’ve heard of some of these cars, but only because I read about them in car magazines and through the internet, etc.

It’s interesting to see that the turn signal stalk is on the left side of the steering wheel on both interior photos of the right hand drive Vauxhall Cavaliers. I thought all right hand drive cars had the turn signal stalk to the right of the steering wheel. This probably caused some unintended flick of the windshield wipers when drivers used to other right hand drive cars drove a Cavalier for the first time… Anyways, thank you for sating my curiosity about the specifics of the company car scheme in the UK.

They used to be on the right, generally until the 1970s, but as UK specific models were replaced with more European wide types the stalks were altered to save making ‘proper’ ones for RHD. Even BL changed over in the end as ‘wrong way round’ became the norm.

I’m not really familiar with the turn signal setup on UK market cars, but in Japan (another RHD country), all Japanese domestic market cars as far as I know have their turn signal stalks on the right side of the steering column.

Wouldn’t it be cumbersome to operate a manual gear lever and flick the turn signal lever with the same hand when making a turn?

As Bernard said, that is the standard setup for UK RHD cars. I started driving in the UK in 1999 and it wasn’t until I worked for car rental companies that I saw indicator stalks on the right. Even Japanese cars had the stalks that way round, with a few exceptions – the Mitsubishi Colt springs to mind. ( Many of those “Japanese” cars would have been built in the UK )

When I lived in Australia I was actually surprised to find that Falcons & Commodores had the indicator stalk on the right, and a friend told me her Focus was annoying because the indicators were on the left as “it’s a German car”.

Its no problem at all I drive a RHD Citroen diesel turn signal on the left I rarely need to change gear it will lug down to 40kmh in 5th gear 750 rpm and pull away again if needed I usually leave it in 4th around town its plain from the commentary very very few of you know HOW to drive diesels its quite different to gas engines.

I don’t think I’ve ever needed to indicate and change gear at exactly the same moment. Why would you? We’re taught to distinctly “Mirror, Signal, Manoeuvre” when making a turn. I guess that stuck.

I had a couple of 80s Toyotas with the stalks the other way around, and it did seem more intuitive, but it’s never an issue. My Toyota (GT)86 has the indicators on the left.

I did flick the wipers a lot when driving RHD cars in Australia recently, though!

KiwiBryce

Posted August 11, 2015 at 1:59 AM

Ive been driving Japanese trucks everything is backwards but you adjust Euro and American trucks the indicators are on the left side but US trucks have the other switches placed randomly all over the dashboard no thought to ergonomics whatsoever.

If I were starting from scratch, I’d set things up so that the turn signals were always, LHD or RHD, on the *inside* so that the wipers could be on the OUTSIDE, accessible through the open driver’s window or door while clearing snow off the car.

It could be worse. Back in the days of the Austin A30 the trafficators were worked by a three-position switch high on the centre of the dash. But then you drove a lot slower in those days – especially in an A30!

Being RHD here in New Zealand our new cars are designed for the European or Japanese markets. The Euro market ones generally have the indicators on the left (eg my current Ford Sierra and Peugeot 307) and Japanese market ones have them on the right (eg my Nissan Laurel). After wiping a dry windsheild with the wipers once (*shreee-eee-eee-eeek*) you quickly adjust. More annoying though is the headlight controls are on the left in the 307 but on the right in the Sierra and Laurel…

I’ve never understood why that is, that on some right-hand drive cars have the windscreen wiper controls on the left-hand side of the steering column and the turn signal control on the right side of the steering column, while for other right-hand drive cars have it vice versa.

A couple of really low-ball offers, but nothing genuine yet. People are scared off by the mileage, but as you’ll know Bryce, if you service a car regularly and properly, mileage needn’t be an issue. It’s still a very good car, and I’d happily keep it, but the rebuild bill for the Sierra is now into 5 figures…

KiwiBryce

Posted August 11, 2015 at 1:52 AM

Those Nissan LD 28s are great motors a friend has two both turboed one in a 48 Ford Bonus F1 pickup with 5 speed and Falcon diff and another identical powertrain in a XF ute, Yeah prices are way down on high mileage diesels, we picked up a 326,000km Pug 406 for $500 in Taranaki it runs and drives great flew thru a WOF the guy just wanted rid of it. Two green PSA diesels near New Plymouth my Citroen and my mates cheap 406

For a continental lad like me is entertaining (and interesting) to learn about all of these details and differences not only between RHD and LHD, but also about the different switch positions within RHDs of different countries of origins… A difference like that I had discovered also in the LHD environment when I borrowed a Renault 4 in my younger days. The stick of the turn signal switch was located on the opposite side in comparison with the Opel for example. So (*shreee-eee-eee-eeek*) happened as well… 🙂

This article stimulated many memories for me, as I relocated to the UK in 1983 to study and then start work as a journalist in London. As a young car buff I was completely unprepared for the whole company car thing and how it dominated and distorted the UK car market.

Being still at an “all-knowing” age then, I resented how this tax dodge presented new cars every few years to those who in the main didn’t need to drive for their jobs at all (yes, there were the archetypal sales reps pounding up and down the motorways, but most company cars were just driven to work and parked); on environmental grounds I hated the stimulus to the auto industry and how it led people away from public transport; and most of all I was just jealous of those whose professions got them new cars while I struggled to keep my old Citroen 2CV on the road.

Roger rightly relates how each manufacturer structured its model ranges (L, GL, GLS, GLX, whatever) and different engine sizes; and people really did pay attention to those badges as a sign of where the cars’ operators stood in the pecking order. No one would ever have thought of de-badging.

Another market-distorter that was strange to an American was the annual change to the alphabetical suffix (or, from 1983, suffix) on number plates, which happened every August. (Originally timed to boost car sales in the summer.) The number plates meant that anyone could see at a glance what year your car was originally registered in, and affected its snob appeal as well as value.

After several transatlantic moves I returned to the U.S. for good in 1998, so I’m only dimly aware of the rule changes that have softened all this. I know that registration numbers are changed several times a year now, and presumably modifications to the tax code mean that the whole “company car” thing does not dominate the market quite so much.

Clearly, though, there are still plenty of companies getting their employees new cars every two or three years. The resulting depreciation is horrific — it’s notable that used cars in Britain cost proportionately much less than they do in the U.S. That at least is a nice gift for the private motorist who’s happy to settle for a two- or three-year-old car.

I imagine many people who actually live there would disagree, but the UK now seems to me like something of a motorists’ paradise. Crowded roads in the southeast and relatively expensive petrol, yes, but balance that against the freedom to bring in and register just about anything from everywhere.

What I see now that lots of used British right hand drive cars are imported to Central- and South-East Europe…because of their cost effeciveness.
So some of the affected countries (with lower g.d.p.) has changed their policies and started to ban the private import of RHD used cars in order to force consumers to buy as more as possible (LHD) new cars from the local dealerships. In these countries the existing RHDs has to be converted at all to LHD which costs are tossing the cost effectiveness of the used ex-RHD cars to the torturing levels for their owners. Some other countries (with moderate g.d.p.) are simply not making difference between the standard LHD and non-standard RHD. Only the headlights has to be converted but not everywhere… Interestingly the RHD cars doesn’t increase the continental accident rate…

This may be due to what’s called Risk Compensation: RHD owners may drive their cars more carefully in LHD countries, knowing they have a “chirality” problem. This was observed after Sweden’s H-Day in 1967, when they swapped driving directions: accident rates declined for awhile before returning to normal!

I heard that too some decade ago… Some Swedish related pal of mine told me also details about the methodology of how Swedes did all of that. They’ve installed new road signs first, than they’ve covered them with blankets…and on the H-day they simply uncovered the new roadsigns…

szilard

Posted August 12, 2015 at 1:45 AM

I researched this H-Day case on the wiki…quite interesting…as lots Swedes already had LHD cars until 1967. Theres a pic shown 1966 Stockholm and cars…the LHD cars are rolling on the left side of the road… 🙂 What a controversy… I asked a Czech biz partner of mine once about how Czechs had changed their own driving side from left to right side… The answer was: “…when the German Empire had annected Czech Republic in the late ’30’s, they drove across the border on the right side of the road. Since that day the traffic stood on the right side and the vehicles went to LHD…”. “Thankfully” to this act…during the occupation Czech Republic had got its first modern highway system…

I have read some local anit-RHD-ist articles where the authors were attacking these vehicles very unprofessionally in ways like “cars of the upside-down world”, “extremly dangerous” or “has to be banned immediately”, etc. While none of these lads ever experienced the RHD cars in our LHD environment. They’re just seeing these cars rolling by others as they make their own not so clever observations and trying to agitate public opinion. These cars aren’t represented in significant numbers. Some folks have their own reasons why they are driving RHDs. But most of them are re-pats who are bringing their own cars from the British Isles when moving back to the continent… And it work in opposite way as well…

British car prices used to be even higher since car makers could profit off the fact that a car could not be bought abroad, because the steering wheel would be on the wrong side and disallowing dealers in mainland European countries to sell to Britons. Then the EU first formally disallowed the latter practice (even though it still happens) and then ordered a flat price before taxes for all cars sold in the EU to equalise the playing field, eliminating any benefits for manufacturers on RHD cars. I don’t know how much of a positive effect this had on UK car prices though. As an unintended side-effect, cars became much more expensive in the Netherlands, where car purchase taxes are massive.

Once I took a Vectra A (Cavalier) 1.7 Litre diesel for a biz trip to Vienna. Unfortunatelly the main coolant hose gave up, the coolant leaked away and the cylinderhead went broken. Somebody tightened too much the metal clamp so its sharp edge cutted the hose… Until that moment I was really enjoying my voyage on the austrian autobahn. My second experience with the Vectra was in Ireland. It was coincidentally a continental left hand drive version with a 1.6 Litre petrol engine and had no issues. The Vectra (Cavalier) was compact in many ways. V6 seems to be quite rare. I also made some shorter trips in few Taunuses (Cortina) as well. Once in a 1.6 Litre automatic and another time in a 2.3 Litre V6 automatic only as a passenger. By the owners opinion Taunus was a gas guzzler no matter if it was a 4 cylinder or a V6. Anyway the V6 Taunus had a nice enginesound 🙂

In 1991, I heard claims this would be sold in the U.S. and Canada as a Geo or Buick, but nothing ever came of it why?

I was 22 back then, now 46 and living in the UK, have been since 1999, and am driving a Vauxhall, the Vectra, coincidentally enough. The Vectra GSi is great; I own a 2004 version. Maybe that’s a future one for you to write about here?

The other point that bears mentioning is that it appears the ubiquitous user-chooser has also had a strong impact on the U.K. used car market. The depreciation on a lot of cars is really savage in the U.K. compared to the U.S., which I’ve always assumed was the product of the large numbers of company cars — you have a bunch of repmobiles on three-year leases, so there’s always a glut of newish off-lease cars on the used car forecourts at fire-sale prices.

It got to the point where buying something like a Mondeo or a Vectra privately was tantamount to setting your money on fire. What’s the point in spending £20K of your own money on a car that’s going to be worth maybe £6,500 in three years? It’s a far cry from the U.S., where a decent low-mileage family car like an Accord or Camry tends to hold onto its value pretty well.

Secondhand Accords & Camrys hold value better than comparable US-brand sedans, so I would not compare these against English Fords & Vauxhalls as it introduces another variable. This is not to say your idea is wrong.

Considering how good each Cavalier was when it was new, or how good the Asconas and the first Vectra were and the quality brand name Opel had going for it, it’s quite amazing how GM Europe lost its way since then. It’s a bit hard for me to tell as I’m a bit too young for it, but did they really drop the ball that badly with the ’90s Opels, most of all the Vectra?

Only in recent years has Opel/Vauxhall really been shedding its image of making bad, shoddily built cars. And that’s even though almost every Opel since the Vectra C has been an unmitigatedly good car that was among the best of its class when new (ok, the Meriva and Ag*la excepted).

The sad thing is that GM is no stranger to doing things wrong. In the 70s, GM USA produced cars like the Chevy Vega, the Buick Skyhawk, cars that self-destructed almost immediately after they left the dealer showroom. The body rusted to dust, the engine and drivetrain were plagued with problems galore. By the late 70s into the 80s, GM screwed up again with the Chevy Citation, Buick Skylark, Pontiac Phoenix, and Oldsmobile Omega. And forget about the 5.7 litre V8 diesel engine and V8-6-4 engine. What a joke! Whatever was General Motors thinking when they designed such piles of s___. it’s any wonder GM didn’t go bankrupt with such disgraceful disgrace.

GM’s decline is well documented here and very obvious, and it actually did go bankrupt. The GM we know today is a different legal entity.

What leaves me wondering is that GM Europe was nowhere near as badly affected by the many boneheaded moves of the parent company. But the Opels of the 1990s drove many customers away, not only because of the Lopez effect since the Kadett E of the ’80s had also left much to desire in terms of quality. GM Europe, now Opel Group, got into major trouble in the 2000s as a result. Was that all caused by the ’90s Opels, particularly the Vectra, being so bad?

I think this is common American mgmt. culture, not restricted to carmakers: There’s never time to do it right, but there’s always time to do it over. This dates back to Ford’s botched introduction of the Flathead, at least. In a country notoriously obsessed with marketing, it astounds me that managers have so little fear of losing customer trust. If I were in charge, that fear would keep me pacing the factory floor or whatnot.

Theory: Japanese companies grasp this better because fear of public shame is a more powerful motivator there.

I’m not against making money, but what good is making money if you don’t do the job correctly to begin with? If a product is assembled correctly to begin with, the car should last indefinitely, requiring little maintenance from the driver, except the usual washing, taking the car every two to three months for check-up, etc.

I could be wrong, but I believe it’s also a worldwide problem. I remember seeing a documentary called The Quality Connection, a 25 minute 1970s film talking about the problems British Leyland had during the 70s.

My father had 2.0 SRI 4×4 in the early 1990’s. It was like a faithful mule or hound, and would lap up all the punishment inflicted upon it. Eventually the transfer box gave up, and was chopped in for a Citroen Xantia TD. The best ride quality I’ve ever experienced (I’ve never sampled a 1970’s American land yacht).

The late 1980’s/early 1990’s company car culture was perfectly summed up in this: